This standard requires leaders to communicate direction not once, but repeatedly, across multiple channels and at multiple levels of the organisation. Clear direction communicated inconsistently is not clear direction — it is noise. Consistent, repeated communication of strategy is what creates genuine alignment.
It supports the policy "Set and Share Clear Direction" by making the communication cadence and reach of strategic direction a leadership accountability.
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| People & Culture | - Direction communicated once or infrequently, assuming it was understood. - Communication seen as an event, not a continuous responsibility. |
| Process & Governance | - No structured cadence for strategic communication. - Direction set at senior levels rarely reaches front-line teams intact. |
| Technology & Tools | - No shared tools or formats for cascading strategic intent. - Communication fragmented across channels without coherence. |
| Measurement & Metrics | - No measurement of alignment or communication reach. - Misalignment surfaces only when delivery fails. |
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| People & Culture | - Leaders communicate direction at planning cycles but not between them. - Some awareness of strategy among direct reports; weaker further down. |
| Process & Governance | - Strategy shared in town halls or all-hands but not reinforced in team settings. - Strategic documents exist but are rarely revisited. |
| Technology & Tools | - Presentations and documents used for one-way strategic communication. - No two-way channels for checking understanding. |
| Measurement & Metrics | - Communication frequency tracked but reach and comprehension not measured. - Misalignment identified reactively through project reviews. |
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| People & Culture | - Leaders reinforce direction regularly and across multiple channels. - Strategy discussed in team meetings, not just leadership forums. |
| Process & Governance | - Communication cadences established (monthly all-hands, weekly team check-ins, etc.). - Direction revisited and reconfirmed when context changes. |
| Technology & Tools | - Shared tools (OKRs, strategy pages, roadmaps) keep direction visible and current. - Two-way feedback mechanisms allow teams to signal misalignment. |
| Measurement & Metrics | - Team comprehension of strategic priorities measured through surveys. - Alignment tracked alongside delivery metrics. |
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| People & Culture | - Leaders actively solicit evidence that direction has been understood and acted on. - Communication quality discussed in leadership effectiveness reviews. |
| Process & Governance | - Communication plans developed alongside strategic plans. - Messaging tested and refined based on comprehension feedback. |
| Technology & Tools | - Analytics on strategy page views, OKR adoption, and alignment tool usage inform communication effectiveness. - Automated signals flag when team-level priorities are drifting from strategic intent. |
| Measurement & Metrics | - Alignment index tracked per team and correlated with delivery outcomes. - Communication reach and comprehension scores tracked over time. |
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| People & Culture | - Strategic direction is embedded in everyday conversation, not just formal communications. - Teams can articulate organisational direction confidently without prompting. |
| Process & Governance | - Communication strategy evolves dynamically with organisational context. - Direction setting and communication treated as inseparable leadership activities. |
| Technology & Tools | - Intelligence tools surface real-time alignment signals to leadership. - Communication personalised to different team contexts without losing coherence. |
| Measurement & Metrics | - Strategic coherence tracked as a leading indicator of organisational performance. - Communication quality and alignment index both input into leadership capability assessments. |